Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo's Playstation Settlement Bombshell (or not...updated)
Magamo writes "Console Talk has the story on a settlement between Sony and Nintendo over the rights to the "PlayStation" name, which was originally a joint owned copywrite, given to a CD and Cartridge based system to play SNES games. The settlement is for 10% of Sony's proceeds, past and present on the "PlayStation" name, currently amounting to approximately $2.3 billion. Nintendo is allowing Sony to pay it off in installments over the next 20 years. Nintendo currently plans on using the money to create a new game studio comprised of members of some of the biggest in the japanese industry, in order to create titles exclusively for the GameCube. Hmm, my guess is that Sony's next console will be shying away from the PlayStation moniker..." CD: It seems that I might have fallen for a hoax. Doh!
I like how the story is down even before any comments. Somehow I don't trust my news from www.consoletalk.com.
My guess is that they will have to drop any backward compatability with the older playstaion consoles when the produce the new model without the "playstation" name tag...
That'll cost em..
"Consider how lucky you are that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far
from news.google.com:
Your search - sony playstation nintendo trademark - did not match any documents.
Suggestions:
- Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
- Try different keywords.
- Try more general keywords.
- Try fewer keywords.
Also, you can browse today's headlines on the Google News homepage.
That Sony will change the name to JUST PS2 and in the next revision PS3, not PlayStation at all. They've put way too much into branding PS2 to let it all go, but they also can't give Nintendo all their earnings.
So look for the new PS3 in 2003 - 04.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
I've been wondering if Sony changed the name from Playstation to PSX, and subsequently PS1 and PS2 due to this issue? Just think about it: Sony knew that Nintendo had joint ownership of the name, so they began phasing it out. The name was too recognizable to drop completely, so Sony just slowly started shrinking the Playstation word in the title of anything, with the intention of not actually calling the console that name anymore. Any opinions? If this is redundant, i'm sorry.
mechanicos ergo cogito
I used to love comic books, video games, and TV. I still enjoy video games once in a while, but my desire for all three of those things has really gone down. I now find Comic books way overpriced for 3 or 4 minutes of plesure, and TV just knaws at my brain.
People really do grow out of things, but it's not like throwing more blood into a video game is going to make me want to play it more. The only stuff that kind of thing apeals to are 12-15 year old boys.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
As a "news site," how liable is Slashdot for posting this story should it turn out to be total fiction? There was apparently zero editorial checking, and since the story isn't there, you have to wonder if it ever was. Did some Slashdot editor just see a cool story and "OK" the submission? If that's the typical way things get done, it's awfully unethical.
Trillian:
> If for no other reason, it's interesting
> Slashdot is one of the sites Google News searchs.
Yes. Slashdot bills itself as a news site, and it is looked upon as a news site.
Begging the question, as several have already asked: If this story had been posted 11 hours later (mid-morning), and it had caused -- even temporarily -- repercussions for Sony's stock value...what exactly would Slashdot's liability be?
(Or, to ask another way: How soon thereafter would Sony OWN Slashdot?)
crib
Please don't read my journal
Surely if Nintendo felt that Sony had screwed them over with the Original PlayStation (the SNES add on) then they should have said something back in 1994* not all these years later.
*Obviously this date is incorrect.
Summation 2
I participated in a focus group for playstation and deamcast a good six months before they were released. One of the questions they asked us was what we thought of the name "playstation." They mentioned that the name "psx" was also being considered. It was the opinion of the entire group that "psx" carried a more serious image than "playstation." Oh well.
Well I don't think anyone's saying that you can't play these games as an adult. Like I said, I enjoy those kinds of things too. But if Nintendo really wants to grab more of an older age group, they should try making games that might appeal to people who really haven't been playing video games their entire lives like we have. Look at Myst; amazingly successful, because it appealed to people who weren't game players.
Nintendo's mistake, I think, is the way they try to twist their franchises rather than making new ones. I really don't understand their thinking sometimes.
It's like, "hmmm..those final fantasy games are popular, let's make our own RPG. Why not use Mario." Why not? How about because he's a freaking plumber in bright red overalls who jumps on mushroom peoples' heads. I mean, come on, we're willing to suspend our belief but not by THAT much.
BTW, I loved Sesame Street as a kid, and can still watch it if a younger relative is. What I hated, even as a kid, was all the Warner Brother cartoons, and I still do. Which is probably the exact opposite of most of the people here...